Joe Shelby Griffith - Page 3

                                        - 3 -                                         
               In August 2002, Appeals Officer Judith Hornstein was                   
          assigned to petitioner’s collection case.  Ms. Hornstein sent               
          petitioner a letter scheduling a hearing for October 8, 2002.               
          Petitioner did not attend the hearing.                                      
               On October 8, 2002, Ms. Hornstein wrote to petitioner and              
          again offered him the opportunity to meet with her.  On October             
          9, 2002, petitioner wrote Ms. Hornstein that because issues of              
          religion and conscience would not be considered at the hearing he           
          saw no point in attending the hearing.  On October 23, 2002,                
          respondent issued petitioner a Notice of Determination Concerning           
          Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330 sustaining              
          the proposed levy.                                                          
               In his petition, petitioner contended that the 10-year                 
          period of limitations for collection for 1988 and 1989 had                  
          expired and challenged the deficiencies and additions to tax for            
          1988 and 1989 on moral and religious grounds.                               
               Respondent concedes that petitioner did not receive the                
          notices of deficiency for 1988 or 1989 and that he is entitled to           
          contest the underlying tax liability for 1988 and 1989.                     
          Accordingly, we review petitioner’s underlying tax liability for            
          1988 and 1989.  Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176 (2000).  If              
          the underlying tax liability is properly at issue, we review that           
          issue on a de novo basis.  Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604,              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011